Again! My reply to the list went to only one person!
Delphine Ménard wrote:
On 4/18/07, Ray Saintonge wrote:
I have no problem with the Foundation's policy
that a national chapter
should be membership based, but just who will be a member for legal
purposes still needs to be defined. In some respects there is a
romantic attraction to having every Canadian who contributes to either
the English or French Wikipedia treated as a member, but that would be
totally impractical. Membership can be based on making a positive
statement that one wants to become a member, perhaps accompanied by a
membership fee; this would also need to be accompanied by a section
about when memberships terminate.
Maybe a little insight as to what others chapters do may help here. I
am not familiar with Canadian law, so I can't say that this fits, but
here are the bulk of membership options that have been developped by
other chapters.
1) membership tied to the payment of a member fee
Anyone who wishes to join can join
=> members are given the right to vote in the General Assembly which
elects the board
2) membership tied to the activity in the Wikimedia projects
Only people with a record of activity in the projects can join. Others
may have to be presented to the board for acceptation.
=> members are given the right to vote in the General Assembly which
elects the board
3) membership is broken down in different categories depending on the chapter
=> voting (active) members
=>supporting members (pay a fee but don't vote)
=> honorary members (pay a greater fee and vote, or don't vote)
=> members that are companies (may vote or not vote)
4) members each need to be approved by the board
5) members may be refused by the board (veto option)
Almost all of the existing structures have an elected board, means of
election vary depending on the status adopted.
Thanks for the response. Though I find that there are practical
difficulties with No. 2, I can basically live with any of these options.
It would be very easy for me to pick one of these, write the bylaws, and
do everything else to get the chapter incorporated. The problem is
getting others to participate by saying which option they prefer and
why. I know from past experience with other organizations that whenever
the topic of writing bylaws comes up people can't run away fast enough.
It comes down to how long does one wait for responses before just going
ahead and doing it, and letting them squawk about bad by-laws later.
Ec